Child trafficking is not an isolated incident… Supreme Court’s strict remarks, sensitivity instructions given to courts

The Supreme Court has termed child trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation in the country as seriously worrying. The Court has issued instructions on how courts should evaluate the evidence of minor victims of trafficking and prostitution in a sensitive and realistic manner. The court warned that the testimony of the victims should not be rejected on the basis of minor discrepancies or stereotypes regarding conduct.

A bench of Justice Manoj Mishra and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued guidelines after convicting a Bengaluru man and his wife in the case of trafficking and sexual exploitation of a minor girl. He confirmed the judgments given by the lower court and the Karnataka High Court under the Indian Penal Code and the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

Child trafficking part of a deeper pattern of organized exploitation

Justice Bagchi said, child trafficking cases are not isolated incidents, but are part of a deep pattern of organized exploitation that continues despite legislative safeguards. Judicial assessment of such cases should be based on sensitivity to the realities of minor victims rather than rigid or hyper-technical standards of evidence. Let us know what the Supreme Court has asked the courts to keep in mind while evaluating the evidence of the victim.

• The complex and multi-layered structure of organized crime networks must be taken into account. Such organized crime activities operate as independent units. Innocent victims are duped by making them gullible through their secret interactions through deceit and fraud.
• This dispersed and apparently uncoordinated way in which crime units operate in the areas of recruitment, transportation, harboring and exploitation makes it difficult for the victim to accurately and clearly describe the interrelationship of these processes, as these are all webs of organized crime activity of which she is a victim.
• Given this situation, the victim’s lack of immediate opposition to the apparently harmless but sinister agenda of the trafficker should not be used as grounds for dismissing the victim’s account as unbelievable or contrary to normal human conduct.
• Courts should take into account that when a minor belongs to a marginalized or socially and culturally backward community, her inherent socio-economic and sometimes cultural insecurity increases.
• If the victim’s statement appears reliable and solid on the basis of close evaluation, then the conviction can be upheld on the basis of her testimony alone. A victim of sex trafficking, especially a minor, is not an accomplice and her testimony should be given due respect and credibility as a victim witness.
• Describing the horrific scenario of sexual abuse even before law enforcement agencies and the court is an unbearable experience, which constitutes a form of harassment.
• This situation becomes even more serious when the victim is a minor and faces criminal threats, fear of retaliation, social stigma, and lack of social and economic rehabilitation. In such a situation, the judicial evaluation of the victim’s evidence should be full of sensitivity and realism.